First off let me say I'm VERY unimpressed with Microsoft.
Many, many install issues.

As far as Director is concerned, it does run but runs very
slow. The app I'm creating has a lot of moving text sprites on the
screen with a 3D window up above. Currently, in authoring or
runtime, the game is not playable any longer. Far too slow. On XP I
was getting 30+ fps, and now am getting 3-5fps. Even some of the 2d
screen fades are slow.

Furthermore, my 3D scene is garbled with lots of z-sorting
errors. (polys fighting to be drawn regardless of their distance to
the camera). It looks like a mess.

Most of this post is information but I do have a question.
Any other people have this massive slow down with their director
apps? Any one else have z-sorting errors in their 3D models that
were not there before VIsta?

I've unfortunately determined what the problem is. Director
MX2004 with the latest update does not support hardware rendering
because it doesn't support anything greater than DirectX 7.0
apparently. Windows Vista doesn't support DirectX 7.0. I tried to
force the renderer to use DirectX 7.0 under Vista and it was not
pretty. 1 fps and nothing drew properly.

The only supported renderer right now is #software. That
explains the z-sorting errors and the slow frame rate I was
getting.

So.... I'm in a world of hurt. I upgraded my development
system to Vista only to find out that Director MX's 3D "engine"
does not currently support Vista.

Does anyone know when a patch will be released to make
Director MX directX 9/Vista compatible?

I'm in a bad situation now as I have a demo of our product
due out next week and development has been ground to a halt because
of this. Any help would be appreciated.

I'm just going to change my code to detect either #directx7_0
or #opengl. It's something that should be done in any project
anyway. If neither is present, then shunt the user to a screen that
says "Program won't run... here's probable reasons... Windows
Vista... multiple monitors..." etc. "Go find a friend with XP or a
Macintosh..."

Yes, this initially seems like a very bad thing indeed, but
there could be a silver lining here. Perhaps this will be the
impetus Adobe needs to make Shockwave DirectX 9.x compatible. We
may finally get some vertex and pixel shaders and if the Z-sorting
errors cratica writes of are endemic to the Shockwave/Vista
environment, then maybe Adobe will give Shockwave a decent Z-buffer
as well and solve some of the transparency and decal issues. HELLO
ADOBE...!!! ARE YOU LISTENING??!!

It appears the problem would show with any Director 3D using
the #directx7_0 renderer playing on Vista. It would show in all
runtime environments, Authoring, Projector, or Shockwave.

I don't have Vista and can't test/see this yet. Can someone
verify that OpenGL rendering still works with Vista? When testing
for OpenGL, be sure you only have one display monitor enabled as
Director will not show #opengl as an option otherwise.

the only option available is software when using
"putrenderingservices()renderedeviceList" on my system as well.

I can force it to directx7 from within the movie property
panel but as I posted earlier, the system comes to it's knees AND
strange things happen to the polys. Some objects do not draw at all
while others don't draw with textures, stretched polys, pretty much
a mess. A mess at about 1/2 frame per second.

There are several reason why our video games and the like
will not run on vista considering the "TRUST" issue, and it running
(trying to) on x10.

Graphic cards out now aren't flying off the shelves with 10
just yet (only assuming).
And the "TRUST" issue will block any port, program,protocol,
that is not endorsed by Microsoft.
Unless you have some type of extention like an adaptor;
Lets say for a hi def monitor. Yup...it'll block that too!!

It even prevents audio recording and other captured media.
Which halts making sound effects and the like.

Then again its only the first release so thing might change.
As for Adobe shifting gears for our 3d engine, lets hope so!!
*good thoughts all around*

I don't know if this is a DRM issue. It just looks like
Shockwave 3D has
serious compatibility issues with Vista.

Another strange thing happens with
getRendererServices().getHardwareInfo().
Director reports "unknown" for vendor, model, and version.
This is with an
ATI card.

"raschko" <kookiedough30@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ercq0k$pc6$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> There are several reason why our video games and the
like will not run on
> vista
> considering the "TRUST" issue, and it running (trying
to) on x10.
>
> Graphic cards out now aren't flying off the shelves with
10 just yet (only
> assuming).
> And the "TRUST" issue will block any port,
program,protocol, that is not
> endorsed by Microsoft.
> Unless you have some type of extention like an adaptor;
> Lets say for a hi def monitor. Yup...it'll block that
too!!
>
> It even prevents audio recording and other captured
media.
> Which suck for making sound effects and the like.
>
> Then again its only the first release so thing might
change.
> As for Adobe shifting gears for our 3d engine, lets hope
so!!
> *good thoughts all around*
>

Hmm. Yeah, I can force the browser plugin to use DirectX7,
but I'm not
seeing any performance problem.

I tested one of my benchmark shockwave files, and the frame
rate increased
from 108 fps (using the software renderer) to 760 fps.

I do get a warning message, though, about the dangers of
changing the 3D
Renderer setting from Obey Content Settings. Whatever.

"cratica" <cratica@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ercofp$nnh$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> the only option available is software when using
> "putrenderingservices()renderedeviceList" on my system
as well.
>
> I can force it to directx7 from within the movie
property panel but as I
> posted earlier, the system comes to it's knees AND
strange things happen
> to the
> polys. Some objects do not draw at all while others
don't draw with
> textures,
> stretched polys, pretty much a mess. A mess at about 1/2
frame per
> second.
>
> This stinks, we have to have a solution ADOBE!!
>
> I still have not heard back from support on this issue.
Will keep
> everyone
> posted.
>

quote:
Originally posted by:
craticathe only option available is software when using
"putrenderingservices()renderedeviceList" on my system as well.

it surprises, that you get anything other than a script error
from that line.
:-P

quote:
Originally posted by:
craticaI can force it to directx7 from within the movie property
panel but as I posted earlier, the system comes to it's knees AND
strange things happen to the polys. Some objects do not draw at all
while others don't draw with textures, stretched polys, pretty much
a mess. A mess at about 1/2 frame per second.

This stinks, we have to have a solution ADOBE!!

I still have not heard back from support on this issue. Will
keep everyone posted.

just out of interest have you tried the newest version of
shockwave ?
they just released version 10.1.4.020 some days ago.

Oh, and running that same benchmark file using the OpenGL
renderer, not so
good: ~190 fps. Same results in IE and Firefox.

"shandar" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in
message
news:erd84t$cqd$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> Hmm. Yeah, I can force the browser plugin to use
DirectX7, but I'm not
> seeing any performance problem.
>
> I tested one of my benchmark shockwave files, and the
frame rate increased
> from 108 fps (using the software renderer) to 760 fps.
>
> I do get a warning message, though, about the dangers of
changing the 3D
> Renderer setting from Obey Content Settings. Whatever.
>
>

"a?ex" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:erd868$cvk$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> just out of interest have you tried the newest version
of shockwave ?
> they just released version 10.1.4.020 some days ago.

"cratica" <cratica@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ergd1h$llm$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> It's been 2 1/2 days since my inquiry to customer
service/support and I
> have
> heard ZERO from them. They state on their website when
you fill the form
> out
> that I would be contacted within 24 hours.
>
> So I guess once you pay them $1200 big ones for their
software, they turn
> a
> deaf ear? Where is ADOBE support at? Should it take 2
1/2 days to
> provide an
> answer?

Hmmm that's not good enough is it?

I am trying to see if my contacts at shockwave.com can get an
answer from
them any quicker. I'll let you know as soon as I hear back.

My partner evaluates a copy of the new release of discreet
3dsmax9. Guess what, doesn't have a w3d exporter, from one version
(8) to the next one (9) they removed the exporter plugin. Further
explanations from discreet point to an incompatibility issue, "that
will be solved in the next service pack (3dsmax)".

I don´t understand something, who provides the APIS,
compression algorithms, formats, data model for the exporter
works?. The exporter used since 3dsmax6 to 8 was the same, what
about now?. About this topic and other issues related to this, i
think there is two possibilities:

1)People from adobe are working in a new plugin, obviously
more powerful and according to the new capabilities of the new sw3d
engine (which we don´t know nothing). This plugin will allow
us to export more rich 3d content (pixel shaders, rt shadows, bump,
procedural textures, etc. And this 3d content will be scriptable
with new 3d lingo (maybe 2.0?) and finally this content will be
rendered with DX3D10 in WV.

Would the people who gave feedback about shockwave3D on Vista
be kind enough
to indicate whether they are using the 32Bit or 64Bit
versions of both Vista
and IE. (from what I've read you can use a 32bit IE on 64bit
Vista to avoid
plugin issues, can anyone confirm????)

Especially Shadar, as the only member so far who has no
performance hit.

"Richard" <donotuse@funpods.com> wrote
> Would the people who gave feedback about shockwave3D on
Vista be kind
> enough to indicate whether they are using the 32Bit or
64Bit versions of
> both Vista and IE. (from what I've read you can use a
32bit IE on 64bit
> Vista to avoid plugin issues, can anyone confirm????)

32 bit version of Vista.

I just installed the latest ATI Catalyst driver, released
yesterday (2/21).
OpenGL performance is much better - frame rates are around
85% of DirectX7
frame rates. Director is still only detecting the software
renderer, though.

32 bit version here as well. I'm sticking with 32-bit since
my understanding is that there are even more issues with the 64 bit
version.

Shadar does have a performance hit, so it does effect
everyone. He indicated that his computer as well only supports
software shader. Sure, if someone is moving one sprite across the
screen and they are getting 100fps, it wouldn['t matter if they run
software or hardware. For those of us using a lof of 3D or even a
lot of 2d sprite movement, the hit is HUGE. Plus, software
rendering will not render many things properly as there is no
z-buffer.

> Shadar does have a performance hit, so it does effect
everyone. He
> indicated
> that his computer as well only supports software shader.
Sure, if someone
> is
> moving one sprite across the screen and they are getting
100fps, it
> wouldn['t
> matter if they run software or hardware. For those of us
using a lof of
> 3D or
> even a lot of 2d sprite movement, the hit is HUGE. Plus,
software
> rendering
> will not render many things properly as there is no
z-buffer.

Yep, don't worry, I realize nobody has it working properly on
Vista, I
passed all that on via shockwave.com. So 64bit is definitely
not the causal
factor anyway.

I am the product manager for Director and Shockwave at Adobe.
We are very much aware of this issue, and have a two-step plan to
address the performance issue on Vista.

1. In the very short term, we will release a Vista-compliant
version of the Shockwave player, which will force the movie to use
DirectX 7. While the performance is still likely to be poorer than
on XP, it will be better than what you see today (with software
rendering).

2. With the next release of Director, we plan to move to
DirectX 9.x.

I appreciate the problems developers are facing, and assure
you that the team is working very hard to fix these performance
issues.

Could you indicate when the next version of Director is due
(rather than the
vague second half of 2007 on the website) as we really need
to know when the
performance issue will be fixed on Vista to satisfy client
expectations.

Can you say if the DirectX9.x based 3D engine will be a
straight port of the
existing feature set, or will it add functionality like
hardware T&L or
pixel shaders?

Also will it fix the various z buffer issues with alpha
mapped polys or
allow the .w3D format to retain multiple UV maps for pain
free light
mapping?

Well, I just installed Win XP on my Vista machine - too many
compatibility
problems with Vista. In an earlier post, I listed frame rates
for a
benchmark shockwave 3d file. With Vista, I was getting 780
fps under DX7.
With XP, I'm getting 800 fps. The ATI driver is the same
version.

Still here, guys. I cannot give an exact release date for the
next version, but it will likely be towards the end of the year
rather than the middle. The Shockwave Vista release (with DirectX
7) will be out sooner - in 6 weeks or so.

We will NOT upgrade the 3D feature set in the forthcoming
Director release. Requirements like new platform support,
performance and text engine enhancements are very urgent, and we
don't want to delay this release beyond 2007. However, we are
committed to maintaining Shockwave as the leading 3D format on the
web, and you WILL see 3D enhancements in a subsequent release. The
move to DirectX 9 is a signal of our long term commitment to
Shockwave 3D.

I know this is not the answer many of you are looking for. I
appreciate your patience, and hope to keep the channels of
communications open!

Wow, thanks for the further info! That is genuinely useful in
terms of
managing client expectations, and the first concrete info
I've seen about
new 3D features, even if they are two versions away. The fact
that the
engine is being updated at all is superb news.